Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom
I would NOT create guidelines about what was and was not acceptable.
|
If that was the system they had, then the author was not in violation of the content guidelines, since there were no guidelines, and they lied in their letter of explanation.
If they pulled the books for being "too objectionable," that may be allowed; if, however, they claim the author violated a rule that doesn't exist, that's a form of fraud.
Quote:
|
I would only agree to act reasonably in banning books.
|
Would you be willing to state what "reasonable" standards you'd be using? I don't mean exact details--I mean the difference between "we have a decency officer who deals with those complaints" and "we have a board that votes" and "we submit books suspected of being objectionable to a pool of readers and reviewers and their chairperson writes up an analysis & we follow those suggestions."
Quote:
|
And since they cannot read every book to determine if it will piss off a majority of their customers,
|
Why not? Because they wouldn't make as much money if they spent time confirming that what they sell fits their standards?
Quote:
they are coming up with criteria on the fly.
Kinda like the TSA.
|
I don't buy from Amazon, and I don't fly, because of exactly these kinds of issues.
Amazon has the right to run its business, within the law (which this decision may skirt but probably doesn't break), any way it likes--but customers also have the right to point out that they're being sleazy and dishonest, and encourage people to stop doing business with them.